^^^^mmi^^mm* 



i^r^m^ 



i'tMt'itil'.i 




•n^iCiiiiu 







• ^ V" • 






WS>/ ** % °°y 



•v 




; . "> 



"-W 







,0 ^. ».l 4 O 



^ 



NT 







V * * • o, o 























v ***** /- 

A G °^ 

.v n « a »0 












a 1 




^^ 







^^ 





^ ^ -Sals?** * ^ °. 

<& A> - w e *u &> ^6 




y 





•i^'4. ^> 




^6* 



* A ^ 



^X 



<\ 















^oV 



4> -^ 



r. « * a 



)■/, 



4 o 




.o 1 








.0 



^0^ 






ELEMENTS OF AGRICULTURAL SUCCESS. 



ADDRESS 



DELIVERED BEFORE THE 



/ 



WORCESTER 



AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY, 



SEPTEMBER 22, 1853. 



BY HON. GEO. S. BOUTWELL, 



WORCESTER : 
JSGIS OFFICE—C. B. WEBB, PRINTER 

1853, 



V4> 



12 '06 



ADDRESS 

DELIVERED BEFORE THE 

WORCESTER AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY, SEPT. 22, 1853, 

BY HON. GEO. S. BOUTWELL. 



Mr. President and Gentlemen 

of the "Worcester Agricultural Society : — 

This occasion is thrice blessed — blessed in the general wealth of 
the harvest, in the autumnal glories of the heavens above us, and in 
the beauty of the landscape spread around. The scenes and objects, 
too, on which our eyes have rested, are fresh, rare, and rich, as though 
nature never before had been bountiful to man : and I first of all 
must solicit your indulgence ; for my theme is old, and its import- 
ance, not its novelty, must commend it to those who honor me with 
encouragement and attention. But if words fail, let the presence of 
autumn and the harvest lead us to appreciate that Goodness which 
has sought through many ways to instruct, elevate, and cheer men. 
Seed time and Harvest ! — the first a season of faith, the last of ful- 
fillment. If either should fail, what would then remain of human 
plans, of human ambition, or of human life? It is not wonderful, 
then, that the ancients gave deities to the corn and the harvest, and 
worshipped them in prose and verse ; for we certainly should do no 
less, if we saw not above the corn and the harvest, the Creator of all, 
to whom only adoration and worship are due. 

It was a rule of ancient oratory, as it is of reason, that -he who 
speaks should of all men about him be best instructed in the subject 
of his discourse. But trusting that this rule shall not now be en- 
forced, I proceed to my subject : The Elements of Agricultural 
Success. 

Agriculture is to be considered in two parts : — First, its relations 



ADDRESS. 



to the individual men engaged in it, and then its relations to the 
country whose great pursuit agriculture is. Success is a magic word. 
To most of us it expresses the object of life ; yet in all classes, that 
object is often what it should not be. With the minister it may be 
fame, with the lawyer it may be clients and fees, with the merchant 
it may be wealth, with the politician it may be office, and with the 
farmer it may be the mere miserly gain of the harvest. These are 
to some extent the proper, but not the sole objects of life, and their 
attainment does not render the actor truly successful. But I speak 
now only of what success is to the farmer. It certainly is not mere 
gain. In the struggle for wealth, other men will easily distance him. 
He can and should acquire a competency, but his gold can never be 
told by millions. He must, then, have many elements of success of 
which wealth can be only one. Nor is this, you will agree with me, 
a misfortune. Men strive for money as though a certain amount 
would secure happiness ; but that amount has never yet been fixed. 
It is, and ever must be, one of the unsolved problems of our condi- 
tion. Some philosophers have contended that there is no such thing 
as matter, and that what we take for evidence of its existence is ideal 
within ourselves. How this may be, it is not wise now to consider ; 
but it is true, that the difference between wealthy men is chiefly ideal. 
Bring before you one man worth a million of dollars, and another 
man worth two millions; is the difference in their possessions any 
thing to them, or any thing to the world? Or a man finds to-day 
that he is worth a million of dollars, whereas last year he was worth 
only five hundred thousand dollars. Now he really sees nothing, pos- 
sesses nothing of value, enjoys nothing, which he did not see, possess, 
and enjoy, before. The total of his possessions is expressed by seven 
Arabic characters, instead of six, and this is the only change he can 
comprehend. But true success to the farmer is quite a different 
thing. Let him have intelligence, that he may enjoy the society of 
books, art, friends, and nature ; genius, that the advantages of his 
position may elevate his character and extend his usefulness ; a spirit 
of progress, that the past may serve only as a guide to a nobler future ; 
health, that he may preside over and participate in the labors of his 
profession, as well as enjoy richly the fruits thereof; land, that he 
may have the independence, confidence, and hope, which come from 
its possession ; taste, that he may not mar the beauty of the land- 
scape, whose variety and glory are a continual feast to the soul of the 
true man ; industry, with an ever fresh spirit, that he may transform 
the penalty of sin into the first of human blessings ; perseverance, 



ADDRESS. 



as other men, that he may overcome the obstacles incident to his pro- 
fession, as they are incident to all; system and science, that his 
industry shall ever tend to wise results; experience and learning, 
that he may unite and use the knowledge of all men and all times ; 
love and respect for his calling, that he may prosecute it with zeal, 
and stand with a feeling of confidence and equality in the presence of 
his peers ; churches and schools, that he may educate himself and 
family in the religion and literature of the language and the age ; 
patriotism, that the homage and service due to the country and the 
public weal, shall never be rendered to self; and finally, that happy 
competency, which neither oppresses with fear of want, nor fear of 
loss, and he indeed must by all be esteemed a successful man. 
Farmers, too, have an equal interest with any other class of laborers, 
in the policy of the government. Nor should the State be indifferent 
to the fortunes of its citizens. Let it establish and maintain insti- 
tutions of general and special learning, enact proper laws for the 
descent and distribution of land, and foster a liberal commercial sys- 
tem by which the laborer has at the same time customers in every 
part of the world, and the produce of every other man's industry 
within his reach. 

Nor should we, in agriculture, more than in other pursuits, under- 
value learning and experience. Both together are knowledge, and 
knowledge is power. Knowledge is made up of two parts, — our own 
experience, and the experience of other men. Learning is the acqui- 
sition and appropriation to ourselves of the experience of others. 
For example, we did not live in the time of Cromwell, and from our 
own observation can know nothing of the events which then trans- 
pired ; but the men who did live have left their record to us, and this 
record stands in the place of our own experience. An acquaintance 
with this record is historical learning, and it is quite idle to reject it 
as of no value. To be sure, it sometimes deceives and misleads us, 
but so does our own experience. Few, I think, is the number of 
farmers who have not found a course of culture succeeding well once, 
and failing at other times. It will not do to reject our own observa- 
tion, nor is it compatible with the spirit of progress to reject alto- 
gether the record of the experience of our predecessors. We are 
to make progress and ascertain the truth, by comparing our own ex- 
perience with that of the world. Thus may we combine the wisdom 
of the past, the learning of the present, the experience of ourselves 
and neighbors, and form a higher system of intelligent labor. But if 
men will neither accept new ideas nor try experiments, progress can- 



ADDRESS. 



not be made. Farmers are naturally conservative. But of this con- 
servatism we cannot make much complaint, for they have already 
been exposed to a variety of impositions, which properly weaken 
their faith in the so-called reformers. Nor will we condemn any 
where that conservatism which can see and feel that the future may 
be as wise and as well as the past, and that some things new may be 
as good as other things old ; but that conservatism which is dead 
blind ought not to lead or control any man. 

Agriculture, however, is more dependant upon the past than are 
other pursuits of this age. Any step heretofore taken, would, if known 
be of aid to the farmer now, but the general civilities of the world 
h%ve so changed that many of the labors of the ancients could furnish 
no practical wisdom for us. It is no doubt true that there are many 
practices of culture and maxims of the farm which are proper and 
philosophical, whose reason yet lies hidden from this age, Agriculture 
is ancient — net only as a means of subsistence, but as an art, a science, 
even as a department of literature. Among all the cultivated nations 
of antiquity it was held in high respect. I may mention Chaldea, 
Egypt, and Greece. And the Phcenecians, who inhabited the narrow 
country between the mountains of Lebanon and the sea, distributed 
the art over the then known world. But Carthage, the most distin- 
guished colony of Phoenecia, appears to have excelled in the knowl* 
edge and practice of agriculture. One of her generals wrote a trea- 
tise in twenty-eight books, which were afterwards translated into Latin 
by a decree of the Roman Senate, and are said to have been the 
model of the Greorgics of Yirgil. At a later period Cato wrote a 
treatise upon the same subject, and in the best days of Borne, her gen- 
erals, consuls, and chief men gave their leisure to the practice and 
study of agriculture. It is reasonable then that these centuries of 
learning and experience, though only connected with this age by so 
frail a thread as tradition, should furnish many rules and maxims of 
wisdom. It is worthy of remark, that prudential maxims, and obser^ 
vations upon the seasons, called signs, which are often philosophical 
indications, live in the common mind both before and after they 
have had a place in the libraries of the learned. It may be that 
many agricultural maxims had their origin in a more perfect science 
than we now possess, or in long observation which is certainly neces- 
sary to give to any theory the character and position of a principle, 

But all knowledge is comparatively valueless without plan in its 
use. Men of respectable attainments, qualified by nature for success 
in life, are common on all sides. Upon other men nature has been 



ADDRESS. 



lavish of her bounty, and they stand apart as the master spirits of the 
age. Yet consider, that of these classes many live and die without 
any claim to be called successful men. Others seem to have no special 
cause for gratitude, yet they succeed. The successful men are men 
of system. It may indeed be said that an inferior theory of labor, 
exemplified in the system of its application, will be productive of 
better results, than a wise theory never systematically applied. Life, 
without system, of whatever sphere we speak, inevitably fails ; but a man 
of ordinary intelligence, with system and courage, is sure to succeed. 
System leads to proficiency, and proficiency is near to success. It is 
equally important in the lowest form of physical labor, in the highest 
form of intellectual labor, and in every combination of these which it 
is the lot of man to develope. Old maxims, that a rolling stone gath- 
ers no moss, and that he who runs seldom rises, illustrate this. Men of 
system, of plan, neither roll nor run from one place or thing to an- 
other, but pursuing the great idea of their lives, succeed anywhere 
and everywhere. But it is just to say, that there is less system in 
agriculture than in any other department of business in New England ; 
and in order that there may be more system", there must be a division 
of labor. In our infancy as a people, we looked chiefly to the cultiva- 
tion of the land for subsistence. Each farmer received the common 
opinion and acted upon it. He cultivated whatever was necessary for 
the support of his family, but ventured not much beyond that. 

But now commerce, and science, and the removal of old but false 
dogmas of trade, have opened to the view of the American people — 
farmers, mechanics, manufacturers and all — hundreds of millions of 
customers. As a nation we look not merely for a subsistence by 
our labor, but also to the acquisition of wealth and power ; not to 
the wealth of money only, but to the wealth of books, painting, statu- 
ary — to the wealth of art, of science, of travel, of literature, of all 
learning of all countries and times ; nor to the power of arbitrary rule 
only, or even at all, but to the power of commerce, of energy, of in- 
telligence — to the power of free principles and liberal institutions of 
government and religion* As individuals we may participate in these 
common benefits. But to this end there must be a prudent husbandry 
of our resources. In general the resources of a farm do not justify 
the attempt to produce everything which the farmer wishes to con- 
sume. Let him then, I venture to suggest, have one leading pursuit — 
the dairy, cattle, sheep, grain, fruit, or hay — and only give the time 
to other branches which circumstances may justify. Of course it is 
not wise to risk the labor of a season upon an uncertain crop, either 



ADDRESS. 



in quantity or price ; but the surplus labor, over and above the ordi- 
nary articles of subsistence, may as a general rule be invested in that 
product for which the taste and experience of the proprietor, and the 
soil and climate are best adapted. It is as impossible in agriculture 
as in mechanics or commerce, that one man should be skilful in every 
department. Let him, then, who is ambitious of success, select one 
branch of farming, prosecute it with system and energy, and he may 
bid defiance to the competition of the world. More than this — we 
shall attain to an excellence now unknown among the western nations 
of the earth. 

As our population increases, we might naturally expect the number 
of freehold farmers also to increase. But this, it is feared, is not the 
case. It is true that in the neighborhood of cities, as Boston, Lowell 
and "Worcester, estates are divided, but mainly for residences rather 
than agricultural purposes ; while in the interior, especially in Ver- 
mont, the large farmers are annually purchasing small freeholds and 
annexing them to their already extensive domains. One cause of this 
accumulation is the almost universal desire among men to acquire and 
possess land ; but a greater cause, though resting on the first, is the 
desire of small proprietors to migrate to the West, where their lim- 
ited means will be quite adequate to the control of large estates. 
Gentlemen of this class will allow me to remind them, that while 
the West has many attractions, it is not altogether a paradise. And 
if we reflect seriously upon the mystery which we call life, shall 
we not say that he who has a home, whether his acres be broad or 
not, in the presence of New England schools and churches, and 
under the influence of an advanced and advancing civilization, is 
among the fortunate men of the country and the world? 

In districts remote from markets large estates are necessary, for 
the chief reliance there must be upon the products of the flock 
and the herd ; and these require extensive tracts of land for sum- 
mer range and winter food. But the southern and eastern sections 
of Massachusetts, including a portion of the county of Worcester, 
are dotted over with important markets which invite the cultivation 
of vegetables and fruits, whose gross product of a single year may 
rise to five hundred dollars per acre. There is to be sure an air 
of nobility in vast landed estates, and we are often forced to re- 
spect the liberal greatness of the proprietor himself, but as a pub- 
lic matter the aggregation of land is an evil. Is it not then worth 
while for the small farmer to consider whether upon the whole his 
fortunes will bo improved by migration to the West ? We are all 



ADDRESS* 



9 



Interested in the growth of the West, to whose prosperity New Eng- 
land has contributed so much; but we are more interested in the 
future position and character of Massachusetts, 

As a mechanical, manufacturing, and commercial State, her future 
is secure; but her agriculture may not retain its present positive 
strength, while its relative power is certain to diminish. Some im- 
portant States have had their foundation and chief support in com- 
merce, others in manufactures, and yet others in the union of both ; 
l>ut permanent national greatness must rest upon a combination of all 
the chief branches of industry. 

Agriculture, not immediately but in the future, is interested in the 
policy of the government. I have said that it was the duty of the 
government to establish and maintain institutions of general and spe- 
cial learning, enact proper laws for the descent and distribution of 
land, and also to foster a liberal commercial system. In regard to 
institutions of learning, Massachusetts has done so much, if not 
always her duty, that there is no disposition and little cause for com- 
plaint. 

The division, possession and descent of land have furnished many 
difficult questions in economy, politics and social life. The govern- 
ment and people of Rome were often violently agitated by the disputes 
which arose concerning the public lands ; and the elections of consuls 
and tribunes were generally determined by these questions. And in 
this country the land reformers have thrown new elements into the 
political cauldron, which, without their aid, would at any moment feast 
the eyes of the witches of Macbeth. The monopoly of the land by 
the nobles and church was one of the causes of the revolution of 1789 
in France, and the same cause has often threatened the peace of Great 
Britain. I do not now, however, intend to discuss it politically, but 
as a moral and industrial question. It is desirable morally, politi- 
cally and socially that a large proportion of the people should be land- 
holders, but it does not therefore follow, as some would have us be- 
lieve, that every man has a right to an equal portion, or a portion of 
the earth. For if so, why has he not a right to a horse or an ox 
wherewith to cultivate it ? And if to a portion of land described by 
metes and bounds, why not to a portion of the seas, lakes and rivers ? 
But no — neither the earth, nor the sea, nor any part thereof, was cre- 
ated for .any particular man, but for the generations of men, through 
long successive ages, destined to possess, occupy and use, so that each 
shall work out the highest form of civilization of which it is capable. 

The elaim of the individual upon society or the State is satisfied 
3 



10 ADDRESS, 



when no unnecessary obstacle prevents the exercise of the powers with 
which he is blessed for his own- greatest good and the good of his fel- 
low men. A possession of land is not different in principle from any- 
other possession. And we are to acquire and use property subject to 
one and the same rule, to wit, so as not to injure that which is anoth- 
er's. And this rule, I think, is the perfection of human reason. In 
all countries governments have assumed to own lands. In some cases 
those lands have been granted to court favorites, in others as compen- 
sation for distinguished public services, and in other cases still they 
Itave been sold to citizens without any discrimination, The right of a 
government to own such land as is necessary for public purposes cannot 
be questioned ; but beyond this, it can only properly hold it in trust 
for the whole people, to be sold to those who may wish to purchase and 
cultivate. And indeed if lands are to be held by non-cultivators they 
may as well be held by individuals as by the whole people. Therefore,, 
while the policy of a government should be favorable to actual settlers 
and always regard their interests, it seems impossible to exclude specu- 
lators altogether. 

Nor can it be admitted that those who desire land shall receive it of 
the government without price. The government, or in other words the: 
whole people, cannot acquire land without cost, either by purchase or 
conquest, more than individuals. Whatever that cost is, it has been 
paid, and upon what principles of morals or politics shall those 
who have bought lands with their own labor be required to give farms 
to those who have none ? Those who have purchased of the govern- 
ment or of individuals, would be hardly treated if lands were conveyed 
to others as a gratuity. But on the other hand, the State may not 
hold lands for mere revenue or for purposes of speculation and gain., 
Our laws furnish a sufficient remedy for the evil of speculative pur- 
chases. If capitalists acquire large tracts they must be broken up by 
the force of events under the guide of the general laws of distribution. 
And it will be remembered that the Roman law limiting a man's pos- 
sessions in land was seldom enforced, The life of one man does not 
admit of great accumulation, and if the State did not create' factitious- 
personages and vest lands in these creatures of the law, and if the gen- 
eral rule of distribution was inflexible, our system of titles could not 
be amended. The conclusion is, that justice requires that those who 
receive lands should pay, but that it is true policy by low prices to 
induce citizens to become freeholders. 

We have no laws of entail or primogeniture in this country, but the 
two evils I have suggested are so near to those laws in principle, and 



ADDRESS. 11 



so well calculated to work out similar results, that I think them worthy 
of consideration when we notice the influence of- tenures and titles 
upon the agricultural interests of Massachusetts. The nature of the 
titles by which men or corporations hold land is not important to the 
present generation ; but we ought to consider that -Massachusetts is even 
yet in her infancy, that land is not valued here as in many parts of the 
world, and that every obstacle to its free sale and transfer will here* 
after be accounted an evil. But I desire, gentlemen, that what I am 
about to say shall be received as suggestion rather than as opinion or 
argument. 

And in this view, my first suggestion relates to what appears to be 
the extraordinary power of persons, by will or testament, to control 
estates after their own decease. And, first, the law which permits 
this, does not seem to be founded upon any principle. We allow a 
person to provide by will that a particular estate shall vest at his 
death in a corporation existing or created for that object, and that 
the rent shall be applied forever to some eleemosynary or other similar 
purpose. The existence of such a power implies absolute property in 
land, equally as if we allowed a man to bequeath the income of his 
estates to his eldest son, and so on, by the rule of primogeniture, for- 
ever. But we have admitted the former power, and refused the latter. 
I see not, I confess, why we should permit either. Upon principle, 
then, can we find a reason why the entailment of the income of estates, 
which is the whole estate when the entailment is perpetual, should be 
permitted in one class of cases, and not in others. 

Let us consider the right which a man can acquire in land. Is it 
an absolute, unqualified property in and control over it ? Or is it 
rather the right to use it during his life ? If the latter,— and I have 
the honor to suggest that it is, — -some of the provisions of our law of 
testament are as false in principle as the laws of entail and primogen- 
iture. But if the first inquiry indicates the nature of property in 
land, then the living men of any generation have the moral right to 
declare who shall use the land assigned by political or natural consid- 
erations to the various States of the world, and also to announce by a 
perpetual decree to whom or what the profits shall inure. This doe- 
trine without limitation can no where be defended. It will be observed 
that I am not speaking of the transmission of property from parent to 
child ; this is the natural and just policy of the law, not the will of 
the original proprietor living and acting after his death. The inquiry 
I submit, then, by way of suggestion, is this : Ought the use and 
income of land to be determined within certain limitations, for a term 



1'2 ADDRESS. 



of years, or without time, by the will of the present occupant, he not 
being the State nor immortal, or by a general rule of public policy 
which shall permit each generation, without revolution or violence, to 
use the land and the income of the land in the way it thinks fit ? The 
law, I submit, makes a distinction which has no foundation in princi- 
ple, when it allows a testator to bequeath property to a corporation for 
a specific purpose forever, and does not allow him to make a similar 
bequest to those who are bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. 

But the distinction of the law may by some be defended upon 
grounds of public policy. And it is agreed that a requisition of pub- 
lic policy is a reason why an admitted principle should not be univer- 
sally applied. The wisdom of our ancestors is not more marked in 
any thing than in the abolition of the rule of primogeniture ; yet this 
rule has existed in many countries — Judea, Sparta, and Great Brit- 
ain, — and its advocates would find something plausible now to say in 
its defence. We borrowed our rule of descent mainly from Borne* 
but the Roman rule has not every where been taken as wise public 
policy. Now, then, our law says that it is bad "policy to allow the 
eldest son to inherit to the exclusion of his brethren. So we all say. 
But the rule of primogeniture was not established, and does not exist ? 
without a reason. In feudal countries, the law of primogeniture seems 
to have sprung naturally from the relations of society required by 
feudalism. But these relations do not furnish a reason pertinent to 
this discussion, and moreover the rule has existed where this reason 
was wanting. But what more natural, even at a period anterior to the. 
Middle Ages in Europe, than that the law should secure to each family 
a home ? And is not this the enunciated theory of the reformers of 
this day ? And in a country unequal in extent to a large and increas- 
ing population, what so natural and reasonable as that each family 
should be represented by one of its own members, who, in a patriarchal 
sense, should hold the estate in trust for the benefit of the whole line 
and name ? And if one was to be selected, who so proper as the eld- 
est son ? And at this day, so does this reason live in the hearts of 
men, the public opinion of Grreat Britain outlaws from social life the 
inheritor of titles and estates, who neglects the claims of his family 
and kindred. Here then is a reason, not a satisfactory but a plaus- 
ible reason, for the rule of primogeniture. _ 

Now, gentlemen, can as good a reason be offered in defence of the 
policy of America which allows a corporation to take land and use the 
income forever, subject only to the will of a donor or testator who long 
since ceased to have an interest in the affairs of men ? I confess I 



ADDRESS. 



18 



think not. It is claimed that these donations, bequests and founda- 
tions are usually for charitable purposes. Granted. But the charity 
which the law of primogeniture contemplates falls upon one's own 
household, and can there be any more sacred charity than that ? And 
while you will not allow the man of to-day to furnish a home, clothing 
and education to his own descendants forever, why should you permit 
him to feed, clothe and educate the children of other men ? It is the 
right of each generation to use the bounties and blessings of nature 
and of Grod, whether they be of the ocean or of the land, of houses, of 
goods, or of gold, so as to reach the end which the civilization of that 
age seeks ; and it is the corresponding duty of each generation to use 
its wealth, whether it be of mind or of matter, for the greatest good 
of the greatest number. And leaving for a moment the laws and tra- 
ditions of men, let us learn a lesson of faith from nature and our pro- 
fession. 

As the proper cultivation of the soil by one proprietor enriches and 
blesses every subsequent owner, so the right use of whatsoever we pos- 
sess will enable us to transmit wealth to the coming generations where 
we have inherited only poverty from those that are gone. I speak 
nothing against charity, nothing against education, nothing — surely 
nothing — against religion, but I think that the wisdom of a living gen- 
eration applied to its own affairs is preferable to the wisdom of a dead 
generation. Now the law of primogeniture, and the law which per- 
mits the accumulation of mortmain estates for eleemosynary purposes, 
had their origin both in fear. Fear in the one case that families, or 
members of families, might be unable to provide for themselves ; and 
fear in the other case that future generations may not make proper 
provision for charity and education. If this fear in the latter case is 
well founded, the remedy will be ineffectual ; for a people thus lost to 
the duties of charity and education cannot be trusted to apply funds 
however obtained. On the other hand, if a people are intelligently 
alive to these subjects, funds thus vested will be unnecessary, for their 
available means would always be equal to their wants. 

But more than this. Special evils take deep and vigorous root in 
general wrongs, and many estates in England, and some in this coun- 
try, are so hampered with restrictions laid on them by men who could 
not see the future, that they give but little aid to the causes they were 
intended to promote. To be sure, when it is no longer possible to ap- 
ply the funds according to the will of the donor or testator, the law 
comes in and furnishes relief; but this power is very much like the 
power of impeachment as a remedy for a bad system of government. 



14 ADDKESS. 



The remedy is resorted to only in aggravated cases, while the great 
mass of the evil remains untouched. 

It is not supposed that the amount of mortmain estates will affect 
the public welfare at present — perhaps never. But of this we cannot 
be certain. As land increases in value and becomes more desirable as 
a subject of investment, the managers of these estates are likely to 
become purchasers of the soil. 

But there are two other causes at work in aid of the evil of which 
we speak. One is the desire to do good, the other is the desire to be 
immortal. Of the desire to do good we speak with respect. Persons 
who have been fortunate in pecuniary matters feel that they are almon- 
ers of the bounty, and often proceed to appropriate it to charity, edu- 
cation or religion, as though nobody else had a right to be consulted. 
Sometimes it happens that the desire to do good and the passion for 
immortality are blended together and institutions are established — as 
the Girarcl College, for example — which do violence to the religious 
sentiments of one age and may shock the civilization and religion of 
all succeeding times. A majority of men do not act wisely, when they 
will what they themselves can no longer use, and their contributions to 
the cause of humanity would be greater if they left their estates to the 
operation of the rule of law, in the belief that a just portion would 
find its way to the poor, the ignorant and the unfortunate. Other men, 
it is feared, lead a life of economy — sometimes of parsimony — that at 
death they may found an institution or contribute to a charity whose 
record shall make them immortal. For the cause of humanity, let the 
number of these be few, but it may be considerable. And if among 
us all there is a man who disregards the common obligations of life — 
who has no neighborhood, no social, no domestic, no religious relations 
or ties, which draw him from the mad pursuit of wealth, and whose 
summit of ambition is to transmit his poor name to posterity, may he 
cease to be an object of respect either living or dead. If in centuries, 
as the result of a noble love of good, or a low passion for immortality, 
or the union of both, a considerable portion of our soil should become 
inalienable in the hands of corporations, it would be an occasion of 
complaint — a source of suffering — a cause of decay. If we view our 
State as destined to live for centuries — if not indeed, as we trust, im- 
mortal — it is essential to agricultural success, to the purity and per- 
fection of social life, that every obstacle to the alienation of estates, 
and their free transmission from one hand to another, should be re- 
moved. 

And, gentlemen, I come now and last to consider the importance of 



ADDRESS, 15 



commercial freedom to the mechanical and agricultural interest ; and 
I do this with confidence, because it is no longer, I believe, a forbid- 
den topic anywhere. If you analyse the most magnificent commercial 
operation of London or New York, you will find it to agree in its ele- 
ments with the humblest neighborhood barter or sale. The spirit of 
trade and the rights of labor require that custom-house and tonnage 
duties shall be removed as far and as fast as practicable. They are 
impediments to commerce, and every commercial obstacle is a tax upon 
labor. Who does not see that if the line of two contiguous commercial 
nations is marked by a range of mountains whose transit costs ten per 
cent., that this ten per cent, is charged to labor, either by reducing the 
price of the product in its native country, or by increasing the cost in 
the foreign ? And who does not see that if this natural obstacle were 
removed, the producer would sell for ten per cent, more, or the con- 
sumer would buy for ten per cent, less, or that the difference would be 
divided between them ? and therefore, that its removal would be a gain 
to labor ? And if upon one frontier there is such a range of mountains, 
and upon the other a custom-house which exacts ten per cent, duties, is 
not one as hostile to labor as the other ? Yet we are zealous in our 
efforts to remove the natural obstacle, but are quite content that the 
artificial one shall remain. I think we are agreed, that when the pro- 
ducts of two countries are not competing, trade should be as free as the 
wants of the two governments will permit. For since governments 
must be supported by taxation, the mere matter of ways and means is 
not of the first importance. But the necessities of government do not 
render it economically true, as some have taught, that the labor of the 
world is actually benefited by the extension of a particular system of 
taxation. Human ingenuity has not yet devised any system of taxa- 
tion which does not extort sweat from the poor man's brow. Custom- 
house duties for the purposes of protection, and inspection laws, alike 
levy contributions upon labor for the benefit of ignorance. 

It is not necessary to protect intelligent laborers from the competi- 
tion of ignorant laborers, nor is it necessary to protect intelligent mer- 
chants, or other men, from the imposition of bad articles of trade. 
Production has two chief elements — the heads and the hands of men. 
If the hands of men were every where guided by the same sum of 
intelligence, the productive power of laborers would every where be 
nearly equal. The protection, then, which labor seeks, is against the 
heads, not against the hands of men. And who need this protection ? 
Those who have the least intelligence, certainly. Now, then, practi- 
cally, is it for the intelligence of Massachusetts to ask protection 



16 ADDRESS. 

against the ignorance of Europe or Asia? What the laborers of 
America need, whether they are planters, farmers, mechanics, or man- 
ufacturers, is that, and all that, commercial freedom which is consistent 
with the revenues of the government. Nor is this qualification neces- 
sarily perpetual. But there is now no pending question more impor- 
tant to labor and capital, both north and south of the lakes and the 
St. Lawrence, than a free system of trade between the British North 
American colonies and the United States. And I desire you to con- 
sider the observations I have made upon commercial freedom with sole 
reference to this measure. 

Why, I ask, should the mechanics and manufacturers of Massachu- 
setts be separated by law from three millions of customers who are at 
their very doors ? Or why should these three millions of producers, 
in their turn, be excluded from the American market, or, what is more 
important to them, from a cheap, expeditious and uninterrupted com- 
munication with Great Britain and Continental Europe ? What man 
sees or infers any benefit from this system of non-intercourse, either to 
the colonists or to us ? If, then, evils there are many, and benefits 
there are none, let us unite in support of reciprocal free trade between 
British North America ond the IJmfcecl Stiri 

America has great resources. Single States of this confederacy 
exceed in territory, and surpass in position, in extent and value of 
seacoast, and in natural wealth, the most renowned nations of anti- 
quity. The results of our national life will be measured by a higher 
standard than theirs. To be in science what Chaldea or Egypt was, 
in arts and arms what Greece was, in commerce what Venice was, in 
agriculture what Egypt or Carthage was, in law and government what 
Borne was, will not be success for us. The life of each of these na- 
tions was in a single idea, which developed a peculiar, yet partial civ- 
ilization. It is for America to accept the living ideas of all States, 
and develope a full and symmetrical civil and social polity. 

With the foundations of this polity securely laid in the pure princi- 
ples of freedom and religion, the structure shall rise in majesty 
crowned with grace; and the testimony of history nnd " v o all 

coming generations, shall be, that the civilization of America gave 
new rights to labor, and new duties to wealth, new virtue to liberty, 
and new dignity to law, new inspiration to genius, and a new destiny 
to the human race. 



SD 10 




4 o. 




^6* 





i 8 T. AUGUSTINE * :^^fr; ^o* ^^ 




mmmmmm 

LIBRARY OF m CONGRESS ^ 



331 598 6 




■ 



^MM 



